search_persons

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It omits critical details: whether search is case-sensitive, supports wildcards, relevance scoring, or pagination behavior (despite having start/limit parameters).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While only three words, this represents under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. The single sentence fails to earn its place by providing no information beyond the tool name itself.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and numerous sibling tools (including get_persons and search_organizations), the description is inadequate. It should clarify the search algorithm and distinguish from listing operations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema adequately documents all 6 parameters (term, fields, exact_match, etc.). The description adds no parameter-specific context, but baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Search for persons' is a tautology that restates the tool name (search_persons). It states the verb and resource but offers no differentiation from sibling tools like get_persons, get_person, or search_organizations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance provided on when to use this search tool versus get_persons (list all) or search_organizations. No mention of prerequisites, indexing delays, or search syntax requirements.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.